Masahiro Chatani is really the main founder of this art style, or at least the one who truly brought it to fruition. photos from his site (and links) are above.

From Ingrid’s site, linked below:

Some say that Origamic Architecture is a part of Origami and some say it is not. So one is divided about this issue. This confusion arises because the folding part is essential in making an Origamic Architecture card; by folding, one models a card into shape. However, when a card is made it is primarily done by cutting. Masahiro Chatani consequently calls his books Origamic Architecture.

Now I’m a bit of an origami purist, at least in the “no cuts” category; but that’s more to keep my mind focused, not because I dislike papercraft that involves cutting. Paper in general is a fabulous resource that has unlimited possibilities. Sticking to one sheet with no cuts keeps me from falling over that “endless” abyss, and allows me to focus on maximizing what I can do within my artificial self-imposed constraints. I find the helpful; am I alone in that?

Perhaps that’s why I find this art form so interesting- it has many of the same things (strict limitations, one sheet of paper) as origami, yet it primarily involves cutting. So very different but quite similar at the same time.

Hello, Ingrid! I saw your new site just yesterday, and it’s full of beautiful pieces.

I would agree that “paper architecture” is a more fitting name, as well.

I particularly like your work, as it seems that you are very focused on this one segment of paper art (and very good at it)… I understand this focus, I think, because I am similarly oriented in my fixation with tessellations.

Do you find that having this clarity of artistic choice liberates or confines you? I often have a hard time with this, as it often seems to be both.

All that being said, I greatly enjoy your artwork, and look forward to seeing new art from you!